On Sunday, March 12, 2017 11:03:44 AM Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Jeff King writes:
> > I can think of one downside of a time-based solution,
> > though: if you run multiple gc's during the time
> > period, you may end up using a lot of disk space (one
> > repo's worth per gc). But that's a fundamenta
Jeff King writes:
> I can think of one downside of a time-based solution, though: if you run
> multiple gc's during the time period, you may end up using a lot of disk
> space (one repo's worth per gc). But that's a fundamental tension in the
> problem space; the whole point is to waste disk to k
On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 03:43:43PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> James Melvin writes:
>
> > The new --preserve-and-prune option renames old pack files
> > instead of deleting them after repacking and prunes previously
> > preserved pack files.
> >
> > This option is designed to prevent stale fi
On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 11:00 PM, James Melvin wrote:
> The new --preserve-and-prune option renames old pack files
> instead of deleting them after repacking and prunes previously
> preserved pack files.
I think some of this rationale...
> This option is designed to prevent stale file handle exc
James Melvin writes:
> The new --preserve-and-prune option renames old pack files
> instead of deleting them after repacking and prunes previously
> preserved pack files.
>
> This option is designed to prevent stale file handle exceptions
> during git operations which can happen on users of NFS r
The new --preserve-and-prune option renames old pack files
instead of deleting them after repacking and prunes previously
preserved pack files.
This option is designed to prevent stale file handle exceptions
during git operations which can happen on users of NFS repos when
repacking is done on the
6 matches
Mail list logo
